Petzval Lens Enthusiasts

OP
OP

Andrew Moxom

Absolutely it will raise the bar on the prices... The resurgence in use of these older lenses has taken on sort of a cult following of late. Even since my first interest in them a little over 2 months ago, I have seen them go for much more money. Especially lenses like Darlot, Voigtlander, Ross, and Dallmeyers. These have always been higher than the other lesser known brands, but more so lately. Even on APUG last week, there were 3 people that were in the market for a petzval swirly lenses, so they are very becoming very sought after. They can still be found though for good prices if you are patient and know what you are looking for though. Most of my searches on Fee bay was on just 'petzval' or 'brass lenses' I extended that to include Bausch and Lomb Cinephor. I was lucky to find two of the Cinephor's within a week! One of 5.75" and one of 7" These are the sister lenses to the 5" one I bought from Jim Galli late September. The one I got from Jim was a little spendy, but I got the 7" lens for $12.02..... Yes $12.02 and the 5.75" for $50 so overall not bad...3 lenses for $150! Then the slight detour to get two Darlot's that came my way. I am in for a lot less than I thought I would be. For me the madness has stopped. I have the focal lengths, varying swirl effects, and coverage I need for 4x5. I need to just focus on shooting with what I have so I am removing myself from the lens contention pool for a while I will be falling into an abyss if I moved into 8x10 and the associated lenses it would require!! That would also mean the couch for a long stint, and probably need to move house if I did that if you get my drift.
 

Stephanie Brim

I keep watching Ebay, but so far I haven't found anything yet. I'm waiting for the Little Green Men to drop some more small ones off at Galli's house so that I can buy one off him.

Dead Link Removed

Close as I've come to Petzval-like, and no swirlies. The real interesting thing is that one of the aperture blades is stuck on this lens. Closed down, the aperture blades form something that's almost triangular. I haven't shot it at minimum aperture yet, but when I do I expect interesting things.
 

Stephanie Brim

That little Darlot would work nicely for me. I saw the one with 7, but I can't do $500 right now. Hope someone buys it and puts the ones they can't use here.
 

Colin Corneau

I'd like to try bid on the first one, Gandolfi. I had a question for the seller, though, first.

And yes, I'd prefer going through the one and only Jim Galli, as well.
 
OP
OP

Andrew Moxom

Someone ought to look at this sucker... I am not sure, but that maybe the earlier version of 'The Eddie ' Lens.... It's a 4" Super Cinephor lens @ F1.8!!! http://cgi.ebay.com/BAUSCH-LOMB-SUP...205|66:2|65:12|39:1|240:1318#ebayphotohosting Not sure if this is before or after the Cinephor II lens. I now have 3 of the Cinephor II lenses. One in 5" 5.75", and 7" I do not need another one. That said, the 5" does not cover 4x5 fully and you are better off cropping square to better use the image circle of the lens. This 4" version maybe very interesting swirly wise, but you may have to take a risk with it. No pics of the lenses.. Maybe ask seller a question or two? He has a couple of other B&L projector lenses. One of them 5" which should be good for 4x5..... Again YMMV ask questions.
 

Stephanie Brim

Go ahead with that one, Colin. Oh, and who took the big pot? Just so I know who to ask.
 

gandolfi

well - somebody called Mollypix...
and for 225$...(32$ a piece....)

which makes the previously mentioned expensive lens even less understandable....:rolleyes:
 

gandolfi

BARRY: regarding the Kranz lens.
I just mesured the focal length to approx 450mm. The aperture (waterhouse slot) isn't that impressive..
about F5.6

I don't know the image circle, but fitting it on my big Gandolfi, I can find out..
 

gandolfi

Barry again.
regarding cameras for this lens..

I have a couple of studio cameras, but the front plate size is of importance here..
the retaining ring is 7" wide (!!) (175mm..) and the threaded hole about 5.3" (135mm)wide...

Apart from my two biggest cameras (the Gandolfi 12x16 and my unnamed 16x20) the size (and weight) of the lens makes it impossible to fit any of my cameras..

(And as you know, it is "silly" to tir the lens on those two cameras, as the negative sizes here are far too big.. (it LOOKS GREAT on the 16x20 camera though..))
 

Shangheye

Does anybody here know if a petzval design lens would fit a modern Toyo 45CF lens board? If not how would I need to modify it? What sutter would you recommend or do they come in a variety of shutters and I just need to work out how to get it on the board? I have a Toyo 45CF by the way and am also interested in recommendations about what focal length, or recommended brands designs etc that would suit the 4x5 format. I would prefer someting loger than 210mm if possible, but no longer than 300mm (no belows extension). Thankyou. Kal
 
OP
OP

Andrew Moxom

Kal, generally anything from 4" to 7" is normally good to go for 4x5. The shorter focal lengths will have limited coverage (some strive for that) and will give more pronounced edge swirls and vignetting. Again, it all depends on the width of the lens too. Regular shutters can be fitted, but can cost quite a bit of money to have someone like Grimes mount it to the back of a lens. I have heard of some folks cutting the lens tube in half at the nodal point having the barrel turned down and threaded, and having a shutter installed. Again VERY expensive. Also, most use these lenses wide open for the maximum effect. For lens boards, I make my own (linhof style) out of fancy woods, and make the lens a friction fit. There are some photos of how I did this in the list of photos on the right hand side of this page. I also use a Packard Shutter on the front of my lenses to give me some control and to allow use of filters to slow exposure down even further. For your requirements a 210 to 300mm lens equivalent in inches is 8.5" to 12" For petzvals, these are quite large and likely NOT fit on your lensboards without much creativity! 7" petzvals may cover up to 5x7 and the effect on 4x5 is limited.... So I would stay close to the smaller focal lengths. You can always crop?? I do crop to square with my 5" petzval as the image circle vignettes heavily on 4x5. As for brands, expect to pay more for names like Voigtlander, Darlot, Dallmeyer, Bausch & Lomb. That said, I can recommend the Darlot and B&L as they are what I use. Magic Lantern lenses are also good bets from any of these manufacturers as they are the same designs without provision for waterhouse stops.
 

Shangheye

Thanks Andrew. Exactly how much vignetting are we talking about with the shorter focal lenths? I certainly like the lens you are using at the moment, and something like that would be ideal. I also intend to be using glass plate slightly smaller than the 4x5 holder (I will cut the glass probably to 3x4) so I will effectively get the crop you describe. My only concern is if i will find someone in belgium/europe who can do the mod to fit the shutter...whow does it work with the packard shutter, do you recommend it? Is it easily fitted? Rgds, Kal
 
OP
OP

Andrew Moxom

Kal, the Packard shutter company is still going !! www.packardshutter.com take a look at them, and then also see my pictures on how I fitted a packard for my set up. It's really quite easy. They work very well, and give much more control than a hat or darkslide used as a shutter! All you need is velcro!!! So far it is very sturdy and can be fitted onto ALL of the petzvals I have. It also shows how I adapted a Cokin P filter system for the front.
 

Colin Corneau

Andrew, I checked out that Cinephor lens -- sounded interesting but those scratches sure give me pause.
 

Barry S

I think 4" may be a little short for 4x5". I have a 4 3/4" projection petzval on my 4x5 and it vignettes about the same as Andrew's 5" Cinephor II. I wouldn't go with a 4" unless you want a circular image on the film. A 4" lens is probably going to give a slightly bigger than a 3" image circle. Also, we don't know if the Super Cinephor design is a petzval. It may be, but many later projection lenses are more advanced designs. You may get some funky results with a more modern projection lens, but they won't necessarily have the characteristic petzval signature. In any case I might bid low if you want to experiment, but don't all of you bid against each other for what might be a marginal lens. I try to get a confirmation on the design, focal length, and coverage if possible--before buying.
 

Barry S

I posted a triptych from my Memory Series. It's a series that includes many petzval images and this triptych is currently hanging in a group show in DC. Unfortunately it gets resized to a very small image here that dilutes the effect of a 17" X 34" print.

Edit: Better version in the gallery at (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I don't understand why the albums only accept 600 pixel wide images vs. 850 pixels wide for the gallery. Also, why can't we pick images from our personal gallery to add to the group?
 

Colin Corneau

That triptych is really stunning, Barry. It caught my eye immediately and was a good lesson for this newbie about what can be done with these processes.
 

ishutteratthethought

Hello Folks,
What would be considered a good price for a 5.5 inch Darlot Paris lens? I believe it is a projection lens without the slot. Glass is clean and all 3 elements and flange are intact. It is approximately 3 inches in diameter, glass is approx 2.75 in dia. I understand that the make up of the projection lens is the same as the receiving lens but without the slot.
The seller tells me the barrel is inscribed "Darlot Paris".
Thoughts appreciated.
-Steve
 
OP
OP

Andrew Moxom

Steve, that should be a good lens on 4x5. The focal lenth is right in the ball park for that format too to give good, but limited coverage so you should get some vignetting and swirlyness. That said, Are you sure it is 3" diameter across the front element? That is quite a large/wide lens. Even though it is a magic lantern lens, it is the same overall design as a 'taking' lens and you will be shooting it wide open anyway! Price wise, if it's in great shape, expect to pay a fair amount for it. Unless you are getting a deal? a similar one went for over $300 on Feebay this week! If the owner knows the value, then be prepared for some not insignificant cost.
 

ishutteratthethought

Thanks Andrew, I already bought it for $125.00, couldn't pass up the opportunity. The dimensions are what the fella gave me when I called him and the pic looked good. The seller is from Maryland, appeared to be a legitimate seller & I am a gambler. I was lucky with a google search " darlot craigslist", he ws trying to sell it for $425.00 earlier but no bites, kept dropping the price and I stumbled along at the 125 dollar price. He had it lying around for 25 years until he decided to sell it.
I am excited to get this one. I am afraid I have this so called lens disease which I hope by getting this one I will put it in to submission for a while.
Steve
 

Akki14

I'm fairly sure I'm going mad. I tried the petzval I bought from Andrew tonight and I tried focusing and I totally somehow failed to focus? In one shot I have the background in focus a bit instead of my husband (arugh) and in the other I could *swear* I had the light glinting off of a glass in perfect focus.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fishies_go_pook/3080297175/ Husband picture with the background in focus)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fishies_go_pook/3081136502/ picture with the glass that SHOULD be in focus but I'm not sure, maybe it is in focus and it has "glow"?
Both pictures were about 2seconds exposures on Fomapan 200, developed in diafine because I couldn't be arsed to do anything else today I used my speed graphic's T mode which I wasn't sure if it'd work or not because it's a bit slow to close and doesn't look like it will close all the way but it does.
Oh yeah and I used a tripod so that should rule out some kind of shaking.
 
OP
OP

Andrew Moxom

Heather that first one would be good, but like you say the focus is on the background.... Remember these lenses have REAAAAAALLY limited DOF and it has to be spot on.... I've had some misses too when doing portraits. The eyes were infocus on the glass, I take the pic, and only the ears are in focus.. My subject moved only a few centimeters and it is off.. That tells me you must have moved (unlikely on a tripod) or like you say, the focus is off. Ground glass should be shiny side out always Also, the petzval signature is sharp in the center and fall off at the edges. Focus does shift at the edges due to the Coma/aberration taking place. TRy to have your focal point closer to the center area-ish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…